Section A: Publication and Authorship

• All submitted papers are subject to a strict peer-review process by at least two international reviewers who are experts in the particular paper's area. The Managing Editor and Editor-in-Chief select the reviewers. The author can also propose reviewers for some journals and article types.
• The review considers factors such as relevance, originality, readability, statistical validity, and language.
• The possible decisions include acceptance, minor revisions, major revisions, or rejection.
• If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a submission, the revised submission is not guaranteed to be accepted.
• Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.
• Acceptance of the paper is constrained by such legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism as shall then be in force.
• Research cannot be included in more than one publication, whether within the same journal or in another journal.

---

Section B: Authors’ Responsibilities

• Authors must certify that their manuscript is their original work.
• Authors must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere or even submitted and reviewed in another journal.
• Authors must participate in the peer review process and follow the comments.
• Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.
• All Authors mentioned in the paper must have significantly contributed to the research. The level of their contribution also must be defined in the “Authors’ Contributions” section of the article.
• Authors must state that all data in the paper are real and authentic.
• Authors must notify the Editors of any conflicts of interest.
• Authors must identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscripts.
• Authors must report any errors they discover in their published papers to the Editors.
• Authors must not use irrelevant sources that may help other researchers/journals.
• Authors cannot withdraw their articles within the review process or after submission, or they must pay the penalty defined by the publisher.

---

Section C: Peer Review/Responsibility for the Reviewers

• Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information.
• Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author. No self-knowledge of the author(s) must affect their comments and decisions.
• Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments in 500 to 1000 words.
• Reviewers may identify relevant published work that the authors have not cited.
• Reviewers should also call to the editor-in-chief’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper they have personal knowledge.
• Reviewers should not review manuscripts with conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

---

Section D: Editorial Responsibilities

• Editors (Managing Editor or Editor-in-Chief) have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article.
• Editors are responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication.
• Editors should always consider the needs of the authors and the readers when attempting to improve the publication.
• Editors should guarantee the papers' quality and the academic record's integrity.
• Editors should publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.
• Editors should have a clear picture of a research’s funding sources.
• Editors should base their decisions solely on the paper's importance, originality, clarity, and relevance to the publication’s scope.
• Editors should not reverse their decisions nor overturn the ones of previous editors without serious reason.
• Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers (in half-blind peer-review journals).
• Editors should ensure that all published research material conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
• Editors should only accept a paper when reasonably certain.
• Editors should act if they suspect misconduct, whether a paper is published or unpublished, and make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.
• Editors should not reject papers based on suspicions; they should have proof of misconduct.
• Editors should not allow any conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers, and board members.
• Editors must not change their decision after submitting a decision (especially after rejection or acceptance) unless they have a serious reason.

---

Section E: Publishing Ethics Issues

• All editorial members, reviewers, and authors must confirm and obey the rules defined by COPE.
• The corresponding author is the main owner of the article, so she/he can withdraw it when it is incomplete (before entering the review process or when a revision is requested).
• Authors cannot make major changes to the article after acceptance without a serious reason.
• All editorial members and authors must publish any corrections honestly and completely.
• Any notes of plagiarism, fraudulent data, or any other kinds of fraud must be reported completely to COPE.